SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2690, 30 September 1871, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMIAL SESSIONS. This Day. (Before Mr Justice Chapman and a Special Jury.) ALLEGED ARSON. The trial of F. W. llclchelt was continued to Counsel for the prosecution (Mr Smith) commenced his address to the jury at ten o’clock, and spoke for over three hours. Mr Barton commenced his address to the jury for the defence at three o clopk. lie premised by stating that the ease differed materially from the last, inasmuch as he knew what hypothesis put forward by the Crown he was called upon to answer on the part of the prisoner. In the course of the trial he (Mr Barton) had been accused of haying threatened and bullied the witnesses. Well, Tic stood before the jury as a threatening bully; notwithstanding that implication, which must have been fastened on him because of the weakness of the Grown s case-for it was a well-known jest among lawyers that when one had a weak case the beat thing to do was to abuse the opposite attorney—or otherwise the ordinary courtesies of the bar would have been extended towards him. Without bullying the jury, he would show them that the evidence of most of the Crown witnesses was to be relied on. He told them, subject to his Honor’s correction, that his business was to explain all the circumstances, not to show satisfactorily that the ppitQner was not guilty. It was the business of tlip Crpwn to bring forward such evidence as left no reas,enable doubt of the prisoner’s guilt. If 'it even came to a contest between the Insurance Companies and the prisoner on the civil side of the Court, it would then and there be only for the prisoner to prove himself guiltless. On the present occasion it was for the Crown to prove that he was guilty. On this occasion he had resolved to call no witnesses, but would rely on the Crown case as made out. Counsel for the Crown had opened a case, which was totally different from that made out. He stated that he would call witnesses —Mr Butterworth, Dr Corley, Miss Cane, for instance —and give evidence as to the value of the Goldammer goods—yet he had not dared te call the one or give the other. What he (Mr Barton) would do would be to call the attention of the jury to the case of the Crown as opened, and how it differed from it as proved; and where the case as opened had been proved to have totally failed. The learned counsel went on to note the absence from the indictment of the charge of wilfully firing the premises, while such was charged, and of the counsel for the Crown claiming that it was not for him to prove that the premises were fired with intent to defraud, while such was actually charged. As to the value of the importations, he submitted the evidence of Hamaan was no criterion. The Crown’s contention that it would have been a gain to the prisoner, inasmuch as being insured for LI, 800, and his goods and furniture being worth only LB3l, he would make over LIOOO. But what were the facts! He would submit a set of figures which would utterly destroy that theory. It was admitted by the Crown that Ll5O was a fair value for the fixtures in the shop. To this was to be added L 173, which represented three months trade (L7OO a year being the admitted profits of the prisoner, and it was but fair to calculate that it would take three months for him to rebuild and re-establish bis business) three months rent, L 25 ; and the rent from his tenant, Miss Cane, which he put down at the ridiculously low figure of L 1 0; the improvements of the shop referred to by Noonan, and valued at L3O ; the difference iu cost in erecting a brick building instead of a wooden one, Lloo i e., he had to build in brick to the extent of LfiOO; while on the wooden building he would only receive LSOO from the Insurance Company in the event of fire. To all this was to be added a sum of LIOO, as representing a sum which it was but reasonable to suppose prisoner would obtain from a contractor for the materials of the old building. This gave a gross total of Ls9o—a total loss of L/>f)o. So that he would lose that sum to get from thp Insurance Companies LSOO, and would have to buijd to the ex-

tent of L6OO. V here was the profit ? Then to take the covenant. There were 21 years to run before he was bound to rebuild, and at the time of the fire 18 years had to run. Yet the extraordinary hypothesis of the Crown was that he took advantage of this curious way of rebuilding his premises at the expense of the Insurance Companies at a loss to himself at the same time. As to the value of the stock. The Crown’s theory was that it could not have been worth more than L6OO at the time of the fire. Hayman proved incontestibly that it was worth fully L2OOO, there was no padding about it: and this was even corroborated by the evidence of Eliott, who, when insuring it, was shown a stock book ■which set forth that it was worth a sum represented by four figures, of which 2 was the first figure on the left of the total column. As to the fire itself. All the evidence went to show that the single cry of “ fire ” heard by Miss Cane, by Mrs Wright, and Constable Sherar. must have been made by tbe prisoner, and that was the inevitable conclusion the jury must come to. If they came to that conclusion there was an end to the Crown case altogether, for to have cried out would not have been the act of a guilty man. If prisoner had been guilty he would have slunk away from the premises, and got to his home by the moat round about way possible. The learned counsel commented upon the Crown’s theories of the origin of the fire atj considerable length, and had commenced to deal with the evidence of the witnesses Chapman, Sherar, O’Keife, and Hodjens, when our reporter left at 4 o’clock.